From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 02:29:37 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 02:31:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION - 2nd excerpt
Message-ID: <20071212.202938.2428.386.ae.dropper@juno.com>
SELF, SOCIETY, AND PROPRIOCEPTION
November 1989 Ojai, California
Lee Nichol: It is not unusual for people to spend an entire lifetime
carefully scrutinizing their personal inclinations and motivations, their
whole psychological make-up. But, somehow, even if one spends that much
time and that much energy, the mind seems to maintain its basic patterns,
without any fundamental change. The question is, is it possible that
after years of study and work in this area that a person could continue
to make fundamental mistakes with regard to observation?
David Bohm: Yes. You see the whole field is very deceptive. Things are
not what they appear to be. The structures are a lot different from what
they seem. For example, one of the basic assumptions that we make is that
one can look at the mind as if one were a separate observer, looking at
something different, as I, for example, can look at the chair and see
that my thought is one thing and the chair is another. The chair is
independent of my thought, and my thought can move independently of the
chair. We may make a similar assumption as we look at our own internal
processes, but this is not true. Our thought profoundly affects the
emotion and the whole state of the body, which in turn profoundly affects
thought in a cycle, a feedback loop that tends to build up. This is one
of the basic mistakes. If you thus start with a false assumption, your
whole enquiry may make things worse, and add more complications to those
already there. There are many such false assumptions that are operating
within our sociocultural context.
LN: If we make this assumption that we can look at the mind as separate
from the looker, and then add to that some approach aimed at bringing
about order or solving problems, it seems that, as you say, this only
compounds it.
DB: Yes, you see, if the assumption of separation of observer
and observed were correct (which it isn't), it would make sense to
project, to find out what is the problem and try to bring about some
desired result as a goal. In such an approach, which is suitable, for
example, in practical affairs, you may change your goal through further
insight, but the basic idea of having some kind of a goal to direct you
is always there. On the other hand, within the mind, this approach may be
totally out of place because there is no separation of the kind that has
been assumed, the goal you project is therefore fantasy, with arbitrary
features of certain ideas that you are simply trying to impose on top of
the confusion that's already there, about which you're actually doing
nothing.
LN: Would it be fair to say that until this particular issue is
quite thoroughly cleared up, any activity in the realm of
self-investigation could only lead to further confusion?
DB: Well it's very likely to. Maybe it could be helpful on a
certain level for people who are extremely disturbed. We can probably get
them past some of their disturbing fantasies with such investigation and
treatment (subject/object approach). But it cannot really get to the root
of the problem. In the long run it will add to it. This, I think, is one
of the key points that Krishnamurti made in all of his talking.
LN: So coming to terms with the dynamics of assuming an internal
separation is fundamental to real investigation. Now, it seems that part
of the difficulty is that we may read this or hear it, and in some way,
it seems quite clear. Then we assume !hat this is not really the issue;
that there is another more important issue or a series of more important
issues, and so we proceed to observe these other issues; but once again,
without having really cleared up this apparently simple and basic
question of how we look at ourselves.
2
DB: Yes, it's not so easy to clear it up, you see, because we're caught
up in it. One can say that one of the problems is, that we may have
insight into this issue on a certain level, but that then there is still
the problem of distraction. In this connection, I have a friend who was
studying young children. There has been a belief, based on the work of
Piaget, that children learn certain concepts, such as conservation of
water at a certain age. But my friend has shown that such learning has to
do with the function of distracting factors. If you can reduce the
distracting factors, they can learn it much earlier. And if you increase
the distracting factors, there may be delays. Or to put it differently,
attention is required to learn, and distracting factors may draw the
attention elsewhere. Similarly, at an intellectual level, you may see
fairly clearly, that the problem that we are talking about here is that
of the observer and the observed, but when the time comes to look in
another context, there are a lot of distracting factors. One of these is
the ability of the mind to create very powerful, vivid, convincing images
that are experienced as real, especially when they move very fast. Thus,
if we take a television set and there is a telephone bell ringing, when
we look into the image and see a telephone, we experience that telephone
ringing in the image though there is no telephone, nothing there except
spots of light. But on the other hand, if it doesn't look consistent, for
example, if nobody answers it, we may think it's the telephone in the
next room and experience it that way. So the way we experience depends on
attribution.
A basic property of thought is to attribute a quality or a property to
something. And then it's experienced as intrinsic to that thing, right?
So I suggest that once you have the assumption of the observer and the
observed, the mind can create an image of an observer looking at the
observed, as you could have in the television set. You could have some
man looking at something and you could say there's the observer, and
there's the observed -- but nothing is going on at all of that nature.
And similarly, in the mind, there will seem to be the observer and the
3
observed, and various little things indicating that combination. Thought
attributes the whole of the process to the observer who is looking at the
observed, and who says that thought comes out of the thinker. What
actually happens however is that thought creates the image of the
thinker, and then it attributes its origin to that image. Thought then
behaves as if it were being produced by a thinker, but in fact, thought
is producing an image which it calls the thinker and attributes itself to
that. The thinker and the thought, and the observed and the observer are
just different phases of one thing, one process. And therefore, as a
person is thinking, very often tacitly and implicitly without knowing
that he's thinking, all of this is attributed to a thinker, which gives
it great authority.
LN: You're suggesting that this separation is actually hidden.
DB: What is covered up is the true nature of the whole
process. Actually there is no real separation, but the assumed separation
is attributed to an image, and the resulting experience is regarded as
proof that there is a real separation. That is to say, the image is
experienced as if it were real, and that is taken as proof that the
assumption is correct. This is part of the way in which the real nature
of the process is covered up.
LN: But all of this that you're describing is generally an
unconscious process.
DB: Yes. We'll call it unconscious, implicit, tacit. The thought
behind it is implicit.
LN: If, by definition, this other process is implicit or
unconscious, it seems that it would take something more than conscious
thinking to reveal the actual dynamics. Perhaps that's the starting
point.
4
DB: Yes. You may say consciously and rationally and
logically this is what's the case, but if your whole feeling and whole
experience and sensation are telling you otherwise, you really can't be
deeply convinced by it, right?
LN: So there are two things going on. An intellectual
recognition that something may be operating in one way, but at the same
time, a deeper set of sensations and experiences apparently indicating
something very different.
DB: We wouldn't necessarily say deeper, but different. It is a
set of experiences that don't agree with your intellectual conclusions,
even though your intellectual conclusions are probably right; you've
probably had a real intellectual insight at that level. So we mustn't
decry the intellect or say it is never of any value in this context.
LN: Instead of viewing that contradiction that you've just
described as a further difficulty, is it possible that that
contradiction, properly attended to, could actually lead to a deeper
understanding of the whole process?
DB: Yes. You have to give attention to this contradiction ---
that's quite right. And the question, then, is how. For this whole
process of covering up and deception is going on. There's a constant
"show" being put on, implying that all this is real, and that the
intellectual stuff is not real. For example, the person may well say,
''I'm not an intellectual, that's just a lot of ideas. My real gut
feeling is that it's the other way." And, "I don't go in for this
intellectualism", so I ignore all that you say, right? What I wanted to
say is that this gut feeling is what is deceptive. There are true deep
feelings, you know, you may get all sorts of responses if somebody dies
that you're close to, or if you look at nature, seeing the beauty and so
on. But then I say there are also feelings which appear to be deep
feelings, but are not, because they are produced by thought.
5
LN: But they have all the attributes of such feelings.
DB: They don't have all or else we could never get out of it. But they
have enough attributes to get by, to be accepted by us as real. The point
is, now, to be able to see that this is what's going on. That we are
producing feelings out of thought. Everybody knows you can whip up
feelings by certain shouts and cries and clamors and marches and songs,
political rallies, etc. It's well known that feelings can in this way be
whipped up, essentially by actions directed by thought, so that such a
response need not be a surprise. What about this sort of feeling as
compared with deep feelings? At the moment that it is happening a person
might not be able to tell the difference. You have a crowd shouting and
screaming and a great leader in front of them shouting and screaming and
driving and urging them on, and so on. So that establishes the principle
that feelings can be produced artificially. But what I was talking about
is much more common than this. It doesn't require a demagogue or some
unusual set of shouts, screams, and cries to do it. Rather, one simply
has to notice that the meaning of a thought tends to be carried out in
terms of feelings all over the body.
(To be Continued)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/cf77673d/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 03:16:25 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 03:21:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
Message-ID: <c47283890712121816o635f7b7auec69f2118e7720d@mail.gmail.com>
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the
segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it,
my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had
=
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and
giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what
=
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it,
my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had
=
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and
giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what
=
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/f4c5f934/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 04:20:29 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:25:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] That would be so great!
Message-ID: <c47283890712121920q3ad95842v59b40f74ed686c59@mail.gmail.com>
Is the offer still open, William?
Date: 17 Oct 97 16:42:29 +0200
Subject: Re: A big laugh
From: "William van den Heuvel" <heuvel@muc.de>
>
> Well, I think ... or perhaps it might be correct to
> say I "feel-think" that we ought to meet - the whole
> virtual group - in real life, face to face, and have
> a dialogue week some place round the globe.
>
> Sit in a circle - and talk. Give ourselves up to the
> collective, i.e "us."
>
> Australia could be nice - even Africa.
>
> Who's got the dough? Seriously,
>
> Matti
OK, let's do it. I can offer the place to meet: in my beautiful historic
vaulted cellar in the city center of Munich. It was built in the 15th
century and even survived the bombing raids in 1944 and 1945.
Faust
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/74e10ef3/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:31:41 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:36:46 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] That would be so great!
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121920q3ad95842v59b40f74ed686c59@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20805.65789.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Doesn't hopp across the pond --puddle?-- hurt mother earth? But then, maybe we don't mind hurting Mom some more //+,}
That might be our ticket, I!
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Is the offer still open, William?
Date: 17 Oct 97 16:42:29 +0200
Subject: Re: A big laugh
From: "William van den Heuvel" <heuvel@muc.de>
>
> Well, I think ... or perhaps it might be correct to
> say I "feel-think" that we ought to meet - the whole
> virtual group - in real life, face to face, and have
> a dialogue week some place round the globe.
>
> Sit in a circle - and talk. Give ourselves up to the
> collective, i.e "us."
>
> Australia could be nice - even Africa.
>
> Who's got the dough? Seriously,
>
> Matti
OK, let's do it. I can offer the place to meet: in my beautiful historic
vaulted cellar in the city center of Munich. It was built in the 15th
century and even survived the bombing raids in 1944 and 1945.
Faust
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/a460f4df/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:27:27 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:39:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION - 2nd excerpt
In-Reply-To: <20071212.202938.2428.386.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <794170.21040.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, thanks a mill. Impressive.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
SELF, SOCIETY, AND PROPRIOCEPTION
November 1989 Ojai, California
Lee Nichol: It is not unusual for people to spend an entire lifetime carefully scrutinizing their personal inclinations and motivations, their whole psychological make-up. But, somehow, even if one spends that much time and that much energy, the mind seems to maintain its basic patterns, without any fundamental change. The question is, is it possible that after years of study and work in this area that a person could continue to make fundamental mistakes with regard to observation?
David Bohm: Yes. You see the whole field is very deceptive. Things are not what they appear to be. The structures are a lot different from what they seem. For example, one of the basic assumptions that we make is that one can look at the mind as if one were a separate observer, looking at something different, as I, for example, can look at the chair and see that my thought is one thing and the chair is another. The chair is independent of my thought, and my thought can move independently of the chair. We may make a similar assumption as we look at our own internal processes, but this is not true. Our thought profoundly affects the emotion and the whole state of the body, which in turn profoundly affects thought in a cycle, a feedback loop that tends to build up. This is one of the basic mistakes. If you thus start with a false assumption, your whole enquiry may make things worse, and add more complications to those already there. There are many such false assumptions that
are operating within our sociocultural context.
LN: If we make this assumption that we can look at the mind as separate from the looker, and then add to that some approach aimed at bringing about order or solving problems, it seems that, as you say, this only compounds it.
DB: Yes, you see, if the assumption of separation of observer
and observed were correct (which it isn't), it would make sense to project, to find out what is the problem and try to bring about some desired result as a goal. In such an approach, which is suitable, for example, in practical affairs, you may change your goal through further insight, but the basic idea of having some kind of a goal to direct you is always there. On the other hand, within the mind, this approach may be totally out of place because there is no separation of the kind that has been assumed, the goal you project is therefore fantasy, with arbitrary features of certain ideas that you are simply trying to impose on top of the confusion that's already there, about which you're actually doing nothing.
LN: Would it be fair to say that until this particular issue is
quite thoroughly cleared up, any activity in the realm of self-investigation could only lead to further confusion?
DB: Well it's very likely to. Maybe it could be helpful on a
certain level for people who are extremely disturbed. We can probably get them past some of their disturbing fantasies with such investigation and treatment (subject/object approach). But it cannot really get to the root of the problem. In the long run it will add to it. This, I think, is one of the key points that Krishnamurti made in all of his talking.
LN: So coming to terms with the dynamics of assuming an internal separation is fundamental to real investigation. Now, it seems that part of the difficulty is that we may read this or hear it, and in some way, it seems quite clear. Then we assume !hat this is not really the issue; that there is another more important issue or a series of more important issues, and so we proceed to observe these other issues; but once again, without having really cleared up this apparently simple and basic question of how we look at ourselves.
2
DB: Yes, it's not so easy to clear it up, you see, because we're caught up in it. One can say that one of the problems is, that we may have insight into this issue on a certain level, but that then there is still the problem of distraction. In this connection, I have a friend who was studying young children. There has been a belief, based on the work of Piaget, that children learn certain concepts, such as conservation of water at a certain age. But my friend has shown that such learning has to do with the function of distracting factors. If you can reduce the distracting factors, they can learn it much earlier. And if you increase the distracting factors, there may be delays. Or to put it differently, attention is required to learn, and distracting factors may draw the attention elsewhere. Similarly, at an intellectual level, you may see fairly clearly, that the problem that we are talking about here is that of the observer and the observed, but when the time comes to look
in another context, there are a lot of distracting factors. One of these is the ability of the mind to create very powerful, vivid, convincing images that are experienced as real, especially when they move very fast. Thus, if we take a television set and there is a telephone bell ringing, when we look into the image and see a telephone, we experience that telephone ringing in the image though there is no telephone, nothing there except spots of light. But on the other hand, if it doesn't look consistent, for example, if nobody answers it, we may think it's the telephone in the next room and experience it that way. So the way we experience depends on attribution.
A basic property of thought is to attribute a quality or a property to something. And then it's experienced as intrinsic to that thing, right? So I suggest that once you have the assumption of the observer and the observed, the mind can create an image of an observer looking at the observed, as you could have in the television set. You could have some man looking at something and you could say there's the observer, and there's the observed -- but nothing is going on at all of that nature. And similarly, in the mind, there will seem to be the observer and the
3
observed, and various little things indicating that combination. Thought attributes the whole of the process to the observer who is looking at the observed, and who says that thought comes out of the thinker. What actually happens however is that thought creates the image of the thinker, and then it attributes its origin to that image. Thought then behaves as if it were being produced by a thinker, but in fact, thought is producing an image which it calls the thinker and attributes itself to that. The thinker and the thought, and the observed and the observer are just different phases of one thing, one process. And therefore, as a person is thinking, very often tacitly and implicitly without knowing that he's thinking, all of this is attributed to a thinker, which gives it great authority.
LN: You're suggesting that this separation is actually hidden.
DB: What is covered up is the true nature of the whole
process. Actually there is no real separation, but the assumed separation is attributed to an image, and the resulting experience is regarded as proof that there is a real separation. That is to say, the image is experienced as if it were real, and that is taken as proof that the assumption is correct. This is part of the way in which the real nature of the process is covered up.
LN: But all of this that you're describing is generally an
unconscious process.
DB: Yes. We'll call it unconscious, implicit, tacit. The thought
behind it is implicit.
LN: If, by definition, this other process is implicit or
unconscious, it seems that it would take something more than conscious thinking to reveal the actual dynamics. Perhaps that's the starting point.
4
DB: Yes. You may say consciously and rationally and
logically this is what's the case, but if your whole feeling and whole experience and sensation are telling you otherwise, you really can't be deeply convinced by it, right?
LN: So there are two things going on. An intellectual
recognition that something may be operating in one way, but at the same time, a deeper set of sensations and experiences apparently indicating something very different.
DB: We wouldn't necessarily say deeper, but different. It is a
set of experiences that don't agree with your intellectual conclusions, even though your intellectual conclusions are probably right; you've probably had a real intellectual insight at that level. So we mustn't decry the intellect or say it is never of any value in this context.
LN: Instead of viewing that contradiction that you've just
described as a further difficulty, is it possible that that contradiction, properly attended to, could actually lead to a deeper understanding of the whole process?
DB: Yes. You have to give attention to this contradiction ---
that's quite right. And the question, then, is how. For this whole process of covering up and deception is going on. There's a constant "show" being put on, implying that all this is real, and that the intellectual stuff is not real. For example, the person may well say, ''I'm not an intellectual, that's just a lot of ideas. My real gut feeling is that it's the other way." And, "I don't go in for this intellectualism", so I ignore all that you say, right? What I wanted to say is that this gut feeling is what is deceptive. There are true deep feelings, you know, you may get all sorts of responses if somebody dies that you're close to, or if you look at nature, seeing the beauty and so on. But then I say there are also feelings which appear to be deep feelings, but are not, because they are produced by thought.
5
LN: But they have all the attributes of such feelings.
DB: They don't have all or else we could never get out of it. But they have enough attributes to get by, to be accepted by us as real. The point is, now, to be able to see that this is what's going on. That we are producing feelings out of thought. Everybody knows you can whip up feelings by certain shouts and cries and clamors and marches and songs, political rallies, etc. It's well known that feelings can in this way be whipped up, essentially by actions directed by thought, so that such a response need not be a surprise. What about this sort of feeling as compared with deep feelings? At the moment that it is happening a person might not be able to tell the difference. You have a crowd shouting and screaming and a great leader in front of them shouting and screaming and driving and urging them on, and so on. So that establishes the principle that feelings can be produced artificially. But what I was talking about is much more common than this. It doesn't require a
demagogue or some unusual set of shouts, screams, and cries to do it. Rather, one simply has to notice that the meaning of a thought tends to be carried out in terms of feelings all over the body.
(To be Continued)
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/ba055a51/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:38:04 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:43:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.374.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <404413.26602.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier "pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts - Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/075bc373/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:44:00 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:49:06 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.373.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <454190.59856.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
I re-re-re-read that now, funny. Still no luck. Okay, no problem, will keep chewing on you. (My teeth are happy campers, well-fed by paste with fennel and propolis and myrrh and ;-8
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Expect no corrections. Beg not. Whatever you say is right.
Rereading is the only possible "corrector." And one might have to wait 10 years
for even that to work.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:54:27 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, and I thought memory drives on fuel, like the rest of our bodies. And what you see as reps is just the daily commute. Please CORRECT me if I am wrong, Funny-))
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Memory thrives on repetition.
"Dave," by the way, has actually
worn out 3 metaphorical sofas.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:18:57 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
How did that get into Hopper Dropper?
Good memory though. Your TAS must be well tuned
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 12:11 PM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count, too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility, requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/a725f213/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:50:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:55:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.369.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <975231.68280.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Dreamy. I dying -|-- )
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I died for it. But what's one funny tree among so many.
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 07:01:50 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Jesus Christ Alfred, what are you talking about?? You haven't been doing a bit too much of that magic powder S of late, have you? Okay, back to reading some O tone Bohm. This Amazon produced on dialogue yesterday at our foot-steps. Hope not to many had to die for it. ;\/
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Penelope Duby. We have with thought set forth a law of causality, the determining principle of which is set above all the conditions of the sensible world; we have it conceived how the will, as belonging to the intelligible world, is determinable, and therefore we have its subject, which is us, not merely conceived as belonging to a world of pure understanding, and in this respect unknown, which the critique of speculative reason enabled us to do, but also defined as regards his casuality by means of a law which cannot be reduced to any physical law of the sensible world; and therefore our knowledge is extended beyond the limits of that world - a pretension which the critique of the hope of meaning, life, declared to be futile in all speculation. AL
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote: Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/72bf9b94/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 10:10:29 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Thu Dec 13 10:15:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121105m13af7952h2d329e8514ef2732@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/26fd824d/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Thu Dec 13 12:18:36 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Thu Dec 13 12:23:46 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <112884.41144.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY123-W587CA6A549E4D5EA73CF8DC640@phx.gbl>
<112884.41144.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W421100F51C521ABE0C192DDC660@phx.gbl>
have you nothing to say about 'we'? it is a big word to bandy about unexamined
-- we(e) rob
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:31:59 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Next we could get some into "them" ;-\
Alanrob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
tell me about 'we'? -- Alan 'n' me
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:35:56 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Zero point two-five would not do, Rob? :--9
Alanrob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Hi Penelope,sometimes this place is more thready than others, when some topic entrains attention. other times it's just smart arses riffing and tweets twattin' about. If I follow half of what gets said I start to become concerned.Rob
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:06:05 -0800From: pennyduby@yahoo.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
_________________________________________________________________
Fancy some celeb spotting?
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/09d84ab5/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:16:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:21:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <420175.78011.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Hi Al, this time around I actually have a glue what you talking about, man. And yes, good idea, will go out later to the woods by the stream and get some fresh air and have a chat with those trees made out of thought -- 100% pure nature ;-'
But gotta finish here with Mom first -- or she with me ;--, deppending how you POV
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/15527a6d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:22:39 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:27:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W421100F51C521ABE0C192DDC660@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <894078.20209.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Well, depends on which me you ask, Rob ][--}
But one could say, we, for a start, would be some Rob and some Alan -- no ;-?
That said, might not even need you for a we, you see, there is plenty of me-s right under my nose. Or maybe: Above. Or, more likely: Bot--h
Some Son Of A _____ (B, like blank)
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } have you nothing to say about 'we'? it is a big word to bandy about unexamined
-- we(e) rob
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:31:59 -0800
From: a.debakey@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Next we could get some into "them" ;-\
Alan
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} tell me about 'we'?
-- Alan 'n' me
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:35:56 -0800
From: a.debakey@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Zero point two-five would not do, Rob? :--9
Alan
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} Hi Penelope,
sometimes this place is more thready than others, when some topic entrains attention. other times it's just smart arses riffing and tweets twattin' about. If I follow half of what gets said I start to become concerned.
Rob
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:06:05 -0800
From: pennyduby@yahoo.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/e40c2610/attachment.html
From pennyduby at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:27:07 2007
From: pennyduby at yahoo.com (Penelope Duby)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:32:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/a2013f82/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:30:48 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:35:59 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <76021.53216.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Wait! What? This thing comes with an unsub-button, too ;>?
Alan
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/83fce44f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:26:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:38:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121816o635f7b7auec69f2118e7720d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <693360.1637.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Yes I! Let us relent not. The show* must must must go. On. Must ;=::
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeMVt3stAo
(All the making of Papa Tas, no?)
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/b4b05c77/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:37:25 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:42:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <452249.67809.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Forgot: Dreams. You (still) got dreams, Pene? What in haven are they (made) of? ,-'
Alan
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/02462317/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Thu Dec 13 14:55:48 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:01:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
References: <691927.13441.qm@web38302.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007b01c83d8f$dde35520$b5c16018@DL01>
Penelope, it might be helpful to begin with the "welcome" from the list. It says, in part:
"It is intended as a place where we can inquire together into David Bohm's proposals regarding dialogue, the process of thought, wholeness and other aspects of his philosophical work. Our intention is to explore his theories, set them alongside other approaches and attempt to find out how we might proceed from where he left off.".
It follows that in order to "inquire together" into Bohm's proposals and philosophical work, one must have some familiarity with what he published.
Perhaps it also follows that participants must be able to use reason to address Bohm's work and philosophy. As a quantum theorist, Bohm was interested in and aware of very small amounts of what actually is. To do that, he went to the origin of reason in or as the Greek logos which they considered to be the structure of the universe.
As can be seen, dialogue derives from the Greek logos. Dialogue therefore implies the use of reason and rationality.
You interested in reason, rationality? -- dl
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 7:06 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/19625abd/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:33:14 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:05:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
Message-ID: <23449.85379.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
I just asked Mom what she wants from Santa this time around.
I bet you will not guess what she says ;-]:
Alan
"Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes I! Let us relent not. The show* must must must go. On. Must ;=::
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeMVt3stAo
(All the making of Papa Tas, no?)
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something